Does britain need a written constitution essay

By constitutional convention, the monarch does not usurp the democratic process and has not refused royal assent since the Scottish Militia Bill in Nonetheless, if it were to be codified, it would be a definite step towards depriving the constitution of one of its most important characteristics:its flexibility.

Does britain need a written constitution essay

In , the Magna Carta required the King to call "common counsel" or Parliament , hold courts in a fixed place, guarantee fair trials, guarantee free movement of people, free the church from the state, and enshrined the rights of "common" people to use the land. When questioning Britain's current constitution it is first necessary to define what a constitution is and more importantly what the British constitution consists of. Parliament is composed of the House of Commons , elected by a democratic vote, and the House of Lords which is mostly appointed on the recommendation of cross-political party groups. In practice, most constitutional litigation occurs through administrative law disputes, concerning the operation of public bodies, and human rights. Chand, B. Since it joined the European Convention on Human Rights in , and particularly after the Human Rights Act , courts are required to review whether legislation is compatible with international human rights norms. Blick, A. The key landmark is the Bill of Rights , which established the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown following the forcible replacement of King James II r. To make a new Act of Parliament , the highest form of law, both Houses must read, amend, or approve proposed legislation three times. UK courts are usually thought to have no power to declare an Act of Parliament unconstitutional. After a prolonged crisis, the Parliament Act of incorporated the convention into primary legislation Leyland, Furthermore, it is suggested that by introducing a written constitution the control of the executive on the legislature would not effectively amount to changing the constitution. Essex: Pearson. Courts interpret statutes, progress the common law and principles of equity , and can control the discretion of the executive.

Additionally, Britain should not adopt a written constitution due to its history, the sources and principles of the constitution, and the practical difficulties that would result from its codification.

This aspect of the British constitution, its unwritten nature, is its most distinguishing characteristic.

does the uk constitution need reform

This simple concept laid the foundations for constitutional government and freedom under the law. For example, a constitution, which was drafted inwould have included declarations about voting rights and the powers of the House of Lords, which would have become redundant after the Great Reform Act ofParliament Bogdanor, Khaitan and Vogenauer, Beatson, J.

Consequently, one of the suggested advantages of codifying the British constitution and abolishing Parliament as the highest source of law would be the control of the executive power by balancing it and making it accountable.

Rated 8/10 based on 115 review
Model essay should the uk adopt a codified constitution